Mrs. Ravita and Others vs MCD and Another

S.N. Aggarwal, J.—The petitioners who are 29 in number have filed a writ petition against the respondents seeking quashing of the advertisement No. 02/2008 published in Employment News for the post of Teacher (Primary) in MCD and they also seek issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or directions to the respondents to allow the Final Year students of Elementary Teachers Education (ETE or NTT examination) to apply for the post advertised vide said impugned advertisement.

The Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (in short ''DSSSB'', respondent No. 2 herein) had issued an advertisement in the Employment News of July, 2008 for inviting applications from eligible persons for the post of Teacher (Primary) in MCD. The last date of receipt of applications from eligible persons mentioned in the advertisement was 12.8.2008. It was specifically provided in the advertisement that the educational qualification, age, experience and other conditions of eligibility as stipulated in the advertisement shall be determined as on the closing date of receipt of applications.

As per the impugned advertisement the essential qualifications required for the post of Teacher in MCD were as under:

Essential : (i) Senior Secondary (10+2) or Intermediate or its equivalent with 50% marks from a recognized board. (ii) Two years Diploma Certificate course in ETE/JBT or B.EI.Ed. From a recognized institution. (iii) Must have passed Hindi as a subject at Secondary level. Desirable: (i) Computer Knowledge.

The petitioners admittedly did not possess the essential qualifications of having Two years Diploma Certificate Course in ETE/JBT or B.EI. Ed. from a recognized institution on the cut off date mentioned in the said advertisement for determining their eligibility on the said date. They all were Final Year students of either ETE or NTT on the cut off date for determining the eligibility mentioned in the impugned advertisement. They have filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the impugned advertisement and directions to the respondents to consider their candidature for their appointment to the post of Primary Teacher in MCD.

Mr. Bisaria, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has contended that the Final Year Students are considered by the UPSC for appointment to various posts in Civil Services, Forest Service, Railway Service etc. He has referred and relied upon the documents being (Annexure-3 at pages 25-29 of the paper book). Mr.Bisaria has further contended that even Rajasthan Public Service Commission has allowed Final Year Students to apply for the post of Primary Teacher in Rajasthan and in support of his said plea he has referred and relied upon Annexure-4 at page 30 of the paper book. Relying upon the fact that the UPSC and Rajasthan Public Service Commission has allowed Final Year Students to apply for various posts advertised by them, Mr.Bisaria has argued that the cut off date for determining the eligibility of the candidates mentioned in the impugned advertisement is arbitrary and is liable to be struck down by this Court.

I have given my anxious consideration to the argument of arbitrariness advanced on behalf of the petitioners but I am sorry I could not persuade myself to agree with the same in view of judgments of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and Others Vs. Anurag Srivastava and Another, ; State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Vijay Kumar Misra, ; Ashok Kumar Sonkar Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, . It will be apt to refer to the judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Sonkar''s case (Supra), wherein the Hon''ble Supreme Court has held that in order to avoid any uncertainty for determining the eligibility conditions, fixation of a cut off date is a must. It is further held in the said judgment that in the absence of any cut off date specified in the advertisement or in the Rules, the last date for filing the application should be considered as a cut off date.

In the present case the cut off date for determining the eligibility of the candidates for the post of Primary Teacher in MCD was specifically mentioned in the impugned advertisement as the last date of receipt of applications from eligible candidates. Since the petitioners did not possess the essential qualifications prescribed in the advertisement for appointment to the post of Primary Teacher in MCD on the said cut off date, they cannot be considered for their appointment to the post of Primary Teacher in MCD. Acquiring of essential qualifications by the petitioners on a subsequent date after the cut off date is of no consequence. I am of the view that by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the cut off date for determining the eligibility mentioned in the impugned advertisement was arbitrary. The cases of UPSC and of Rajasthan Public Service Commission relied upon by the counsel for the petitioners is of no help because it is for the Appointing Authority to decide the cut off date for determining the eligibility of the concerned candidates for various posts. In the cases of UPSC and that of Rajasthan Public Service Commission, the Appointing Authority in its wisdom fixed a cut off date for determining the eligibility of candidates as the date of selection and, therefore, parity cannot be drawn from such instance.

In view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which fails which is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.